Reverse Health care Amendment? State side block....

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Soliloquy

Chibibar said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100201/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_overhaul_states

Ok. This is kinda interesting. If a state DID make it amendment, how does it hold up in court? I guess the court could check against the constitution (like the CA one regarding prop8) but I think this might actually stick.

What do y'all think?
Click to expand...
That IS interesting. They're probably hoping that the State amendments would be upheld due to the U.S. Constitution's tenth amendment, which reads:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Click to expand...
And since the power to mandate health insurance isn't granted to the Federal Government in the constitution, the states have the right to prohibit mandates.

Of course, that interpretation of the constitution hasn't been upheld for a long time, so I'm guessing the courts will overturn the state amendments.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

What purpose would blocking healthcare amendments have for the state? If it was mandated at a federal level, they'd still have to pay taxes for the service they aren't getting, whether the state likes it or not, assuming the state laws aren't just overridden by Federal ones like they nearly always are. If it isn't mandated, it's basically the equivalent of giving a raspberry to the federal government (it might be fun, but it doesn't help you).
 
Covar

Covar

One that I can think of off the top of my head. If a state passes it it would be suicide/pointless for that state's Senators and Congressmen to vote for any healthcare bill. It would be a) not in the best interest of the state and the citizens of that state and b) a clear sign that the state citizens do not want it.
 
C

Chibibar

The way I see it (which is limited since political stuff can get pretty weird and twisted in terms of logic)

If a state pass this amendment, they can use it to NOT follow the federal mandate since constitution trumps mandate (most of the time) also like Covar said, the respective senators and house would automatically vote against any federal mandate healthcare bills since their state is against it (per constitution).
 
S

Soliloquy

There was a meeting of Clark County, Nevada Republicans that I was present at late last year (for observational purposes only, trust me). I remember them mentioning something along these lines. I think that their idea was that they'd pass the law to prevent themselves from having to deal with the mandate, then try to get the U.S. supreme court to overturn the requirement for them to pay for something that they're getting no benefits from.

Sounds a bit... risky to me. But hey, if the people want to do this on principle, more power to them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top